Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryany
Those bonus points don't really have much to do with capability, which is what this program focuses on. In most cases, it isn't really that much harder to hang over an ubertube than on a blank peg. Forming a logo doesn't mean your robot is better than another robot who placed 3 tubes on different racks, so the program doesn't consider those either.
|
The issue has less to do with finishing a logo and more to do with how the teams are ranked based upon "total points contributed" and "total average points contributed". If you're only ever counting a top-tube as 3 points, regardless of whether it creates a logo or is on an ubertube, then perhaps teleop isn't as skewed as I thought. Yet ubertubes really are worth 12 points in a full game analysis (especially when analyzing Einstein-capable robots), so discounting their value and then ranking teams based upon an overall " teleop+auton contribution score" is bound to be wrought with errors.
On the same note if we hung 4 tubes in a match, 2 on top and 2 on mid, simply because our
alliance put up the other 4 tubes on top, then we're penalized in this system. Relative to a robot who's the only tube-scorer in a match that puts 4 up top by itself, we're really about the same. It's more a matter of circumstance than capability.
Granted, my team only ever hung 4 tubes in a single match and our ubertubes had an 80% score rate (I think we had 31 tubes total). Yet none of the 'ranked' statistics account for any of the non-quantifiable things that happen in a match -- like being the partner in an alliance who's simply 'beaten' back to the rack by a second, so in the interest of time we place on a lower rack.
It's why our scouts simply lumped together mid/high tubes unless a robot could
only get to the middle. Perhaps it's something to think about moving into future years.